1992 11 19CHANHASSEN HOUSING AND
REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
REGULAR MEETING
NOVEMBER 19, 1992
Acting Chairman Bohn called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m..
MEMBERS PRESENT: Don Chmiei, Jim Bohn, Charlie Robbins, and Tom Workman
MEMBERS ABSENT: Mike Mason
STAFF PRESENT: Don Ashworth, Executive Director; Todd Gerhardt, Asst.
Executive Director; and Paul Krauss, Planning Director
APPOINTNENT OF NEW CH~R~AN=
Bohn moved, Robbtns seconded to appoint Tom Workman as Chairman of the
Chanhassen Housing and Redevelo~aent Authority. All vote~ in favor and
the motion carried.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
Chmiel moved, Bohn seconded to approve th~ Minutes of th~ Housing and
Redevelopment Authority meeting dated Novem~r 2, 1992 as pre, eh'ted.
voted in favor except Ro~bins who a~tained and the motion carried.
All
VISITOR pRESENTATION~3:
Workman: Anyone wishing to address the HRA may do $o at this time. Is
there anybody that would like to address the HRA? Let the record note
that 3chh Dorek is in the audience and Gary Brown.
Gary Brown: ...I'm dealing with the Hanus property.
Robbins: Are we on tape now so we can record the Minutes?
Chmiel: Yes, it's running.
Gary Brown: So I may speak now Charlie? Thank you. I'm somewhat
confused as to the sale of the City purchasing the Hanus property. And
number one, I don't know why the City's buying it, and I guess that's
none of my business. Number two, I guess I don't understand why the City
is getting in the real estate business but that's I guess your folks'
business. My main thing here is, and I'm sure you're aware of this, that
I do have an option agreement to purchase the part that we're in which I
pay towards that option every month. I pay $525.00 a month I believe it
is towards the purchase price of that property. At no time have I ever
entered into a real estate deal that I was going to buy that somebody
else had a previous option on. So I guess I'm a little bit confused as
to how this thing is all going to take place. I've .got a concern here
because I stuck a couple hundred thousand bucks in this building out of
my own pocket. And the reason I stuck it in there was because I figure
on being there for the rest of my life. And I just don't want to be aced
out of this thing so to speak.
Housing and Redevelopment Authority
November 19, 1992 - Page 2
Workman= I frequented Hr. Brown's establishment today due to a flat tire
and having discussions with him and I asked him how this thing was going.
Now ! became confused as to what was going on myself. And so I thought
it might be a good idea for him to come up because he had some concerns
and questions too that maybe staff can repitch what has happened. I know
there's been a lot of different things going on and I thought this might
be a good time to bring this all back into focus.
Ashworth= Sure. I apologize for being late .... Ann Hiller. She had me
on the phone from 6=30 until 7=30 talking about water in her backyard.
The agreement that we entered into was one really of the HRA...so the
improvements could be completed on the property. The acquisition is a
discussion...have occurred for almost 2 years. Every time we went
through the process and we thought we had the next hurdle taken care of,
there'd be new ones behind it. The HER is aware that two of the big
hurdles were recognition that Gary did have the right to re-purchase a
portion of that property after, I believe from right now it's 3, 4, 5
years. A little less than 5 years from right now. As far as we can
tell, that remains as a valid option. We wanted to accomplish certa£n
things associated with that property and the final agreement we reached
was one in which we purchase the property, keeping intact the option that
Gary has to repurchase that portion of the building that he's occupying
after 5 years. But with the contingent that Gary Kirt would take out our
position within a one year period of time and he put up financial
guarantees to insure that that takeout would occur.
Robbins: Who is he now?
Ashworth: Gary Kirt. And so really it's Gary Kirt that needs to
continue to work with Gary Brown. Gary's got two things going. He's got
a 20 year lease. So does Toll.
Robbins: Gary Brown, not Gary Kirt?
Ashworth: Oh I'm sorry, did I say Gary Kirt?
Robbins: Yeah.
Ashworth: Gary Brown has a 20 year lease and so does Toll. Gary Brown
has an agreement option to take dollars that he has been putting in for
rent and to convert those into an equity position in a buyout of his
portion of the property. Quite frankly, all of those things going on, we
didn't really care to touch the property. It was only as a result of
wanting to insure that that back area was somehow taken care of from
Highway 5, that we created some type of a berm or something in there. We
also established covenants or other restrictions that basically would
insure that they did not have continuous sales of vehicles along the
highway. Those were the only two reasons that we became involved in that
transaction. We only did it after we had assurance back from the City
Attorney that in fact Gary Kirt would in fact be forced to p~rchase back
from us after a year. There was a hidden portion there as well in that,
this would help solidify the financing for Gary Kirt. What he couldn't
basically do to the front door he was able to accomplish through the back
door with us being kind of the financing vehicle. That's still all
Housing and Redevelopment Authority
November 19, 1992 - Page 3
private so the Minister's Life will stay in place.
Workman: So we have nothing going on?
Ashworth: We have an escrow amount that includes improving the tenant
space which was an original agreement that Gary Kirt had made back to
each of the tenants was never able to accomplish. $o we have
$100,000.007 25 of Kirt's and an additional 75 that's put aside to
insure that those improvements occur which then would include harming or
whatever else.
Gerhardt: Parking lot.
Workman: 8ut we'd never end up owning the building?
Ashworth: We own it right now. There is a guarantee. Guaranteed resale.
document back to Gary Kirt. If he fails to perform on that repurchase,
we take his monies that he's put up to guarantee that.
Workman: Then I'm missing the relationship between Toll and Mr. Brown.
With their 20 year lease.
Ashworth: Those leases were originated between Gary Kirt and Gary Brown.
When we came onto the scene, those were in place and we either would have
to buy out Gary's interest in his long term, we'd have to do both. We'd
have to buy our his interest. His long term lease. You'd have to buy
out his option to purchase. We didn't want to do either of those things.
Workman: Okay, so he's still on track. We've never intended, to own this.
building for 20 years?
Ashworth: Right.
Workman: We intended to make sure that the surroundings got cleaned up
and that everything would go on as planned anyway so.
Ashworth: At one point in time there was consideration saying, well what
does it hurt to have a 20 year ownership. There's good tenants up there.
There's no need to evict them. We just want to kind of watch what's
going on. But when that fell through. When we realized that we really
couldn't control it because of the two leases, because of the option, we
chose the later option which was get in there. Do the work but guarantee
that Gary Kirt has to take us back out. $o after the one year position,
Gary Brown will never know that we were in and out.
RobbinG: But I think we can.
Ashworth: Hide it from you. Gary and I had a similar discussion a month
ago.
Robbins: No, I think Gary raises a valid point. Because we've had this
discussion before on the Hanus building and I think I'm on record about
this started back last May or June. A variety of times about the
structure of the situation. Are we in fact landlords and at the time I
Housing and Redevelopment Authority
November 19, 1992 - Page 4
raised a question. I don't think we want to be landlords. I don't think
that's the question here. Gary's got-a business in town and obviously
wants to keep something somewhere going on. And as far as, I think the
intent is, I think'really what we're trying to accomplish here is just to
get signage and get it cleaned up. I mean that's the bottom line here
think. That's the way it sounds here. Whether Gar7 has his deal in back
or Gary Kirt gives us the right to clean his outfit, what differnce does
it make you know who owns it because it still allows Gary and I have to
go on record as saying is that Gary Brown and I are friends too as well
as with the Mayor and with Tom and with Jim and all of us. We all know
each other and he knows you and knows Todd of course. This way I think
it gives Gary Brown the right, yes. If in fact he wants to do anything
about his personal situation, the right to do that as long as we've got
control of s£gnage and cleaning it up. I think that's the intent.
don't think it's who owns what or we want to be landlords...the other
things we want to do. I think we intended just to make sure that Gary's
happy. We're happy. Everybody's happy and everything gets done I think,
isn't it?
Gary Brown: I would think so...aspect that's why I'm here asking the
question. So in fact.
Robbins: Gary, wha~ is your understanding?
Gary Brown: ...in other words, you guys do own it now?
Robbins: We own, okay so we own the total building or just the share
without the, being in the real estate business and the lending business
as I am, we own it without the condolizing of Gary's and Toll's
speculation or with it? That's a legal question by the way.
Ashworth: Well that's a triggering type of a thing. $o in other words,
after 5 years Gary Brown can approach Kirt and say, you'd agreed that you
would sell me this part of the building in 5 years. I have that in
writing from him.
Robbins: From Gary Kirt or from Gary Brown?
Ashworth: Gary Kirt.
Robbins: Now what if Mr. Brown wishes to exercise the option tomorrow?
Ashworth: That's not an option. He can do it at that timeframe but I
don't think he's got a right to advance the timeframe'.
Robbins: What does his lease say with Mr. Kirt?
Ashworth: That's a separate document but it is a 20 year lease. $o he
has both documents.
Robbins: But that does give him the.Fight of buy-out?
Ashworth: The lease doesn't but the other document that says that he has
the right to buy that portion of the building after 5 years, that stays
Housing and Redevelopment Authority
November 19. 1992 - Page' 5
in effect during this whole thing. I should warn you Gary and I think I
may have told you this. But I had the City Attorney look at that and I
know that Brad had drafted that document as a representative for Gary
Kirt but it's very difficult just to sell a part of the building'. Things
are not in place from a city standpoint to allow him to do that. He
should be working I would say for the next 3 to 5 years to try to perfect
that thins.
RobbinG: But the building can be condolized and be sold off as parcels.
Ashworth: All I can relay is what the City Attorney stated to me and he
said, I don't think that there's a way that Mr. Brown is going to be able
to perfectuate this thing. But if the City is involved, I mean it's not
going to be an easy process. There's. going to be lots of screaming
before it gets done. 8ut that's between Gary Brown and Gary Kirt. Not
between us.
Workman: Does that...pieces together?
Gary Brown: I believe I understand it, yes. I just received this in the
mail this afternoon so I mean I had an hour to look at it and that was
it. before I got up here.
Gerhardt: I've sent Gary copies...
Chmiel: Too many Gary's.
8ohn: With the HRA owning that building, we also own the Taco building,
and are we going to be owning the Red-E-Mix building too?
Ashworth: Very shortly.
Bohn: Okay. Now the only access to that property will be from the Gary
Kirt property.
Ashworth: That's correct.
Bohn: $o are we going to have to be part of building down to get through
there?
Gerhardt: ...an option.., and by Monday night you*il have an easement to
go through that property...
Ashworth: And there was an existing right-of-way that is also in there.
I don't see any reason to ever look to removing a bay '~t hypothetically
we would have that right after, before this resale triggering would
OCCUr.
Bohn: That doesn't effect Gary's part anyway?
Ashworth: No.
Gary Brown: Well, I guess it could yeah. For the fact that that's where
we store our cars and stuff back there. The impound for Carver County
Housing and Redevelopment Authority
November 19, 1992 - Page 6
and things like that. For Public Safety of Chanhassen and things.
Ashworth: Yeah, Gary has been using that area for impounding, if and
when those properties to the back were ever developed and if a road were
ever put through, you'd have to address the issue of does the impound
function continue to exist. And if so, where. But I don't see that
coming up. There is mufficient easementm with the one that Todd is
talking about Monday night, to gain access to the back of that property.
Between the old one and the new, 60-$0 feet.
Robbins= Okay, back to the building again. If in fact this 5 year
period comes in. Would it aIso allow~ is it in there where it allows if
by chance that Toll or Gary Brown wishes to buy it back rather than Gary
Kirt. Would that be possible? Because it's possible that they may want
to buy it back from us rather than Gary Kirt.
Ashworth= I don't know about the, first of all Toll is only in there as
a leasee...Whether or not Gary could accelerate his right to purchase, I
don't know. I could pose that question back to Walston.
Robbins: I think that's an important question because that probably
hinges on a lot of what we're, talking about here. If in fact it gives
Mr. Brown the right to purchase or not. That's really the crux of the
argument I think.
Ashworth: The only thing that the attorney relayed to me was, Gary
Brown's agreement to be able to purchase a portion of that building will
stay in effect without purchase and our resale back to Mr. Kirt. That
Gary Brown's position does not change at all. Those were his words to
me.
Gary Brown: In other words, my purchase agreement did not mean anything.
You guys just kind of hurdled over that one and forgot about it.
Ashworth: Oh no. We had to take it with us. It went with our purchase
and it will go with the resale back to Gary Kirt.
Wot kman: Gary Brown hasn't lost anything?
Chmiel: No. Shouldn't.
Workman: No leverage or other?
Ashworth: Jim Walston informed me that Gary Brown's position would not
change in any respect because of this transaction.
Robbins: Do we have something on that in writing. Do we have that
documented?
Ashworth: I could take and obtain that.
Robbins: I think that's obviously in Gary's interest to protect him. I
feel awkward because I'm walking the local business person as well as the
Housing and Redevelopment Authority
November 19, 1992 - Page 7
HRA so I'm kind of edging both sides. Ail of us are. I mean it's the
same situation with a lot of local businesses here.
Ashworth: I have no problem requesting Mr.'Walston to put into writing
that, it's two things right? Or maybe even one. Mr. 8town's position
does not change one bit with the sale to the HRA and proposed resale to
Mr. Kirt.
Robbins: Gary, would that help you or not help you or do you feel
comfortable or not comfortable or what's your position?
Gary Brown:
have.
If it isn't a whole lot of trouble that would be nice to
Robbins: Gary, I'm sorry.
Gary Brown: I said if it wasn't a whole lot of trouble to get it'd
probably be nice to have. Alright. I'll get out of your guy's hair.
Thank you. Thanks for answering the questions.
Workman: Thanks for coming Gary.
HIGHNRY 5 - ~PPROVRL OF PHASE TX CONTRACT N~TH B/~RTON-~S~ ~ C~J~IROS
FOR THE HIGHWRY 5 CO~ZD(O STUDY.
Krauss: This was on your agenda at the last meeting. It has to do with
the Highway 5 corridor planning program. This has been an ongoing effort
from the city. I think we've been involved with it now one way shape or
form for a year and a half. You know Jim and the Mayor and Todd have
been involved with the early meetings with Bill Morrish and then that's
grown into the appointment of a Highway 5 Task Force. The Mayor's
appointed, I think we're up to 17 or 18 people now. We had our third
meeting last week. I think we really hit the ground running with this
meeting and it's moving foward. It's an exciting program. The Council,
I guess the arrangement as I understood. The program was authorized
through the City Council with the understanding that the HRA would be
ultimately funding it because the highway runs through 3 or 4 or 5
current and pending tax increment districts. We were asked to do it in
two phases. The first phase being, the first couple of meetings that we
had generally which was, let's figure out what all'the issues and
opportunities are. Let's clarify the work program. Let's not spend a
whole lot of money at that point until we get it going. The second phase
was the one that's before you now which is, the real guts of the program
which is outlined in the work program that's attached here. There was
some question as to who Barton-Rschman or how does 8arton-Aschman and
Camiros relate to one another. One of the things we did, and we did it
with the approval of the Council to save time, was rather than go through
a 3 or 4 month interview process with opening up the door to request for
proposals and on and on and on, we worked out an arrangement where Barton
Aschman had already been working with us on Highway 5 issues. Had been
working with us on design issues. Is working with MnOot obviously and a
frontage road on the other project. And offered a lot of the services we
needed. Now they didn't offer the whole package of services. Barton-
Aschman is primarily an engineering firm. They have a fairly good
Housing and Redevelopment Authority
November 19, 1992 - Page $
landscape architecture. They worked with us very well in the early
phases with Bill Morrish and his people in tying that together. They're
not a strong planning firm and I felt we needed to introduce a good urban
planning component because we need new ordinances coming out of this. We
need land use suggestions and things of strong planning orientation.
Barry Warner suggested Camiros and I kind had to kick myself for not
thinkin~ of it in the first place. Camiros has had an office in
Hinneapolis for 2 yeats now. They're working with Minneapolis on redoing
their Zoning Ordinance and several other projects. They're really based
in Chicago and what made me kind of kick myself for forgetting it is I
had been to a conference in San Francisco on urban design that was given
by one of the principals of Camiros and have since, I brought them up
here to speak to the Planning Association at recent conferences on urban
design because they're really innovative in that area. And they bring
the expertise that we needed for that kind of urban design focus. $o we
had Barton-Aschman and CamIros joint venture on the project. Barton-
Aschman is the nominal contractee and Camiros is a subcontractor to
Barton-Aschman so we're only getting one bill in essence. But that's the
arrangement that was set up. In terms of the dollar cost, the dotlar
cost for Phase ZI is $51,500.00. It's a fair sum of money but I'll be
honest, I mean this is, even if we go back a year, and I think Mayor, you
asked me what I thought this whole thing would cost and I kind of threw
something on the table. I said ! don't know, $55,000.00-$60,000.00.
It's going to be right in that range with the Phase I and Phase II. It
is a very intensive work program. They are doing quite a bit for us. I
think 3im at the last meeting you saw the kinds of things that are being
produced and I think we're real excited about where this program is
going.
Chmiel: If I could just interject. With Barton-Aschman, Barton-Aschman
has been, as you indicated, tied in with the Highway Department and by
having those two together, Barton-Aschman still has to be there so we
know what the Highway Department's thinking so we then can tie in
accordingly with Barton-Rschman and they comthg back and informing us,
although there is one bill as Paul said. It's not going to be exceed, or
I shouldn't say exceed. The bill is not going to have two sides to it.
51 here and 51 there. It's just a straight 51 for one individual.
Robbins: I would move that we accept item 3 as stated that the contract.
Chmiel: I'll second that.
Workman: ~ny further discussion?
Robbins moved, Chmiel seconded that the HR~ approve contract funding of
$51,500.00 to complete the Highway 5 Corridor Study. All voted in favor
and the motion carried.
CONSIDER TAX INCREMENT PL~ AMENDM~T~,
Ashworth: Didn't I just put the copy of the letter that I had sent to
the School?
Chmiel: That's right...
Housin~ and Redevelopment Authority
November 19, 1992 - Page 9
Ashworth: This comes from our meeting from a month ago where both the
School District wasn't in but I had disclosed to the HRA their concerns.
specifically associated with the new school referendum and the concern as
to when districts would expire and being able to coordinate the
expiration of those districts with the school referendum and also State
laws as they deal with excess levy dollars and whether or not the cities
ct Chaska and Chanhassen would be in a position to release a portion of
those dollars earlier so as to again help relieve some of that school
problem. Before we can modify our plan we need to send copies down to
both the School District and the County and as I had pointed out in my
report from a month ago, the first question that both the School District
and the County are going to ask me is, when is your existing district
going to expire. That gets back into this issue that for years I've been
telling them, '95-96 and at this point in time we're talking about
extending it and carrying it through the year 2000. Being able to carry
out local projects. I'm quite sure that they will be disappointed in
that news and that's why when we had started.meeting with them, talking
about well are there other ways in which, that all parties can literally
be a winner? Where rather than the city giving up this 40~ of these
dollars into a fiscal.disparity POOl, losing $800,000.00 on fiscal
disparity distribution, is there not a way by which we could continue to
do our project and still make you people happy. That's where we came
back to the position of potentially modifying the 'plan to include
construction of county roads within the city of Chanhassen. They'd have
to be within the district. By the way, that all wouldn't come out of
this particular district...strong likelihood of a third. When Opus comes
before the City Council with their request to subdivide the property
lying east of TH 41. Between TH 41 and CR 117. Anyway, so as to avoid a
potential problem with the'County and the School, I drafted this letter
where I suggested that if in considering those plan amendments, or the
Plan amendment that would literally carry this through the year 2000, if
they would do that but do it under the understanding that the tentative
agreements that we've kind of reached would in fact be put in place
either now or at least give them some hope that they in fact would go
into place. So I don't know if I acted right or wrong...
Workman: Ne don't have any action on this?
Ashworth: But I wanted you to be aware that I was notifying them. Again
you're fully aware that the Target closing did occur. You're probably
not aware that they delivered a check to my house last Tuesday night.
$1,686,000.00.
Workman: You move down to Brazil?
Ashworth:
be Don.
It's spelled wrong. It said City and I said it's supposed to
Robbins: But back to the item though. I would also think you want to
tell Dave Clough that we endorse it. To provide a positive response.
I'm on the Advisory Task Force for the School Board so I would think if
you could provide a positive response for this.
Housing and Redevelopment Authority
November 19, 1992 - Page 10
Ashworth: If they can continue to receive postive reactions from
Chanhassen and Chaska, it's going to make a significant difference on
this proposed bond sale. I mean first of all you're talking about $50
million. But I can tell you, the combined work that we have done, the
initial draft had that as a $450.00 increase on an average valued home,
well they had an average house as $60,000.00 or $80,000.00. I told the
~uy from Springsted, where do you find that house. $60,000.00 isn't
average. But anyway, they have it up to now $150,000.00 home will see
about a $140.00 decrease in 1993 with a $210.00 increase in 1994. It
will stabilize from there on out. Their job is going to be to convince
the voters, first of all convince them that the $140.00. They've really
got it in their pocket. Secondly, you know think about using those'
dollars. I mean from where you're sitting right now, if you approve this
referendum, it's going to cost an average, 1~0 is maybe a little on the
high end for our homes in Chan but it will cost about $60.00 to $70.00
more than you're paying today. The problem is, most people will take
that $140.00. They'll forget that it was reduced the $140.00. Another
trick is, the truth in taxation notices will be, you will receive those
within the next week and so the Don Ashworth prediction of that $120.00-
$130.00-$140.00, feel free to give me a call and say, you dope. Mine
.just, I think you will find that the numbers will be about what I'm
giving. Bit of caution and that is, for people living in the Minnetonka
School District, and Councilman Dick Wing should be closing his ears.
The referendum that was approved in the Minnetonka district and now the
debt service associated with that will chance their's from 64~ up to 77~-
78~ so they're going to see an approximate 13~ increase in addition to 2
from the County so.
Workman: 77~ meaning the School District's share?
Ashworth: Yeah. That's like ours is 25~, the County is 40 somethin9 and
the School District is 60 something so the total is like, was 130. How
you ~et more than 100~. So for those homeowners, they will see some tax
class reductions and so a lot of the homes in the Minnetonka district are
more expensive homes. The $150,000. to $200,000. bracket. The formula
change for those types of homes will produce about a 12~ to 13~ decrease.
And so the 15~ increase, we probably won't hear from those people during
the truth in taxation hearings. It will look to them as though it was
about the same. They just didn't know what they could have had.
Workman: You know we're showing the spirit of cooperation in all this
with the School District and the County and everybody else and might not,
our local editor doesn't get here very often but it might make for a well
deserved story.
Gerhardt: This will be back on Council and the HRA agendas for approval
a.~ain...
Workman: Make sure that he understands.
Ashworth: And I did put it in the Administrative section for this
upcoming agenda but you're saying to me that you think that maybe I
should ~ive him a call?
Housing and Redevelopment Authority
November 19, 1992 - Page 11
Workman.' Or send him this letter.
Ashworth: I've been fearful to do that until there was final action by
the HRA or council.
Workman'. Yeah, but I mean it's going' to happen-.
Chmiel: Yeah, but it could change in some ways and it'd be best that
once it's finalized...and I'm sure it's going to go that way.
Workman: Because the HRA doesn't often get, you know and a guy like Gary
Brown kind of epitomizes that. Like what are you guys doing. A little
suspicion there so we can get a little good press, why not.
Ashworth: Just have suspicion of legislators.
Workman: Well, if that's aII you have on that, we'll move on.
Chmiel moved, Workman seconded to approve a Resolution approving
Modification No. 12 to the Redevelo~Naent and Tax Increment Financing Plan
for the Chanhassen Downtown Redevel~ment p~oject. All voted in favor
and the motion carried.
DISCUSSION OF 1993 BUDGET.
Gerhardt: At our last HRA meeting I handed our a preliminary budget for
all HRA members to review and ponder over the last month. I received the
revenues side of it and on the back side you have the'expenditure side.
No real drastic changes overall. You know promotional expense. We
continue to expand on our 4th of July activities with the hotdogs at the
picnic and promotional expense associated with Market Square-Grand
Opening. The Art Festival. It seems that the HRA should take more of a
role in trying to promote activities in the downtown and assist in
marketin~ those efforts in ways of drawing people to the downtown and to
shop here. Office equipment. Again, we're looking at always to upgrade
our computer operations here, similar to what we did last year. If
there's anything that you have in mind that you want to try to
accomplish, we've got our overall capital improvement goals such as the
Park out front. The library. The potentia~ senior housing. Capital -
~ro.jects. We would bond for those. Those aren't included in your
operational budget. These are what I would say are some of the smaller
dealings you know.
Bohn: With the library project, are we .going to purchase the Barnes-
Klingelhutz property?
Gerhardt: We're working with Mr. Farmakes in finishing out the details
of his drawings and trying to lay out that area. I know Jeff has met
with Mary from Carver County, librarian and he has done some detailed
surveying in the area to try to fit his building in there. Right now
we're trying to get a handle on what the County foresees this library
being. It's pretty clear that they want to be a one story facility. They
have needs of 65 parking stalls but Mary is still somewhat up in the air.
Housing ~nd Redevelopment Authority
November 19, 1992 - Page 12
She was talking about how this library would operate into the future in
Chanhassen and I think the next step is for Mary to make a decision and
then bringing Mary, Don, Strgar-Roscoe and sitting down and finalizing
those plans and bringing them back to you to show how this area might be
developed with the library.
Chmiel: Just a quick question in regards to that. Have we discussed
this further with the Library Soard? They took the position that they'd
rather be located over on 79th Street, adjacent to the shopping area now,
which they mentioned before. Has that been turned around? I know I have
had discussion with some of those members and told them where I thought
we were really coming from and that we still look to this particular
piece of property for the library.
Gerhardt: The only thing I'm aware of is that 3elf took his concept plan
and met with Mary and Mary told him that she would be looking at at least
a 15,000 square foot facility all in one story. Rnd the site that he was
promoting was the Pony/Pauly/Pryzmus/Klingelhutz/Barnes area. And in
that would have the acquisition of the Barnes/Klingelhutz property. And
Mary gave him some more details on the plan. She was looking at some
lon~ range efforts of the library and I had discussions with her and she
wanted to talk more in detail with Don. I don't know did she ever...
Ashworth: No, because again 3elf's plan has to be done in more detail so
you know how many parking spaces you have there. How access would be
obtained. We've encouraged him and I think that he has had one meeting
with their library consultant so you can get some ideas at what shape
they'd want this library in. And I know that he's been getting or
oetting for him the base map so he can actually draw in the parking lots
and what not. But like Todd said, he has met with 3elf a couple of times
but it's not moving too fast.
Robbins: With regards to that, let's assume that the library says no.
We don't wish to relocate it. We'll go elsewhere. Would the building
still be constructed and used for pure office space without the library
in there at the Pony/Pauly/Pryzmus/Klingelhutz/Barnes? In other words,
would the, the way the building was drawn now with the one that Jeff is
doing, whether the library's in there or not, would that still occur?
Ashworth: I don't know what you'd use a str.ucture for if it were not for
a 1 ibrary.
Robbins: Office space because at one time there was a plan to show there
was going to be an office building in there. For office space and now
it's more, I agree it's more decorative. So office space and at one time
we had talked about that being an office complex. So it's still possible
That could be used for office sans library.
Ashworth: The County policy is one in which,, if a city within Carver
County will provide space for a library, that they will, if it's within
their budget, occupy that space and provide the books and personnel. The
policy really doesn't give them the option to take and say, how big it's
~oin~ to be or what color it's going to be or where it's going to be. As
a courtesy I'm sure we want to take and do all of those kinds of things.
Housing and Redevelopment Authority
November 19, 1992 - Page 13
But * ~
~ ve got to believe, if you buiid them a building and you say you
want them to occupy that buiIding, they w£II occupy that buiIding.
Gerhardt: I think what Charlie's point is is, if the library decides to
no over on Market Square, would we go over there and build an office
Duildin~.
Ashworth: But they can't. See that would violate the County policy
because the County is not out building.
Robbins: But we could still build a building there. We could still
build an office complex there.
Gerhardt: We couldn't build an office.
Robbins: Somebody would.
Ashworth: You'd have to build it as .a library and then say, cops.
Nobody occupied this. We'd better take and lease it out.
Robbins: But that could happen though.
Ashworth: Yeah.
Workman: We've got to have our ducks in a better row than.
Chmiel: Yeah, although I don't think that they would move into that
particular direction.
Robbins: But at one time there was a plan of where there was going to be
an office building over there without a library involved.
Workman: Didn't traffic dictate, and the oddity of that corner dictate
that that wouldn't...big, big traffic?
Gerhardt: We had concepts for retail, office. Just leaving it as a
park. I think they were all presented to the HRA.
Robbins: That's the original question. That was really the point of the
question because are we still going to proceed anyway regardless of what
the library does?
Gerhardt: There's so many other amenity parcels available right now for
office you know. This would probably be a choice but not the first
choice. To build an office building.
Robbi ns: 0 kay.
Workman: The only thing I'll add to that discussion is I've had some
~eople concerned that we're going to build a park here and then we're
~oin~ to have another park down there by the library. It's getting to be
a lot of park.
Housing and Redevelopment Authority
November 19, 1992 - Page 14
Asnworth: ...Todd's discussion on the budget as we're going through it.
It should, the HRA should realize that your budgetary, process is
different than that let's say of the City. You're involved with projects
so you decide we want to do a project, we're going to do the project in
front of here. You'll end up bonding for that so you'll set the amount
of dollars that are necessary to do this project or to make Rosemount
happen or to take and do the library or to take and be a part of the
Target thing or whatever else. You end up bonding for that and really
most of your operational levies are going to pay off the projects that
you already have underway. $o there's not really very much stuff I'll
say that's out of your current operational budget. Most of it is in
pawing the cost for each of these projects that you've already done.
Maybe I've made things more confusing than helpful but I mean that's why
you have such a big listing under that budget portion for the, he doesn't
even show it. Yeah, transfers to debt service. All of those were
various pro,iects that you got involved with.
Robbins: Just to ask a layman's questiop on the, because the way it's
~ro..jected as a budget. It says '92-93. One question is, is there a
document we could correlate with this that' shows actual has been spent?
Gerhardt: The idea estimate of '92 will show pretty much the balances.
Robbins: Let me just go through the question here. To show an actual
because I've got an accounting background. $o you've got budget versus
actual expenses. Then secondly, do we have a separate, for lack'of
words, checking account or just an account that shows dollars that we
have or what our P and L is or our balance sheet? Do we create one of
those?
Ashworth: You are a separate fund.
Robbins: Because I've had people ask me, how much' is in the HRA checking
account, as an example? I don't know. Is it $1.007 Is it $5 million?
Or what?
Chmiel: Put a few O's behind it.
Robbins: But I think that's a valid question though because the fact
that, I mean we are taxpayer money here so we should be able to see what
we have.
Ashworth: If you would like, we do monthly budget reports that include
the HRA. We have for the last 10 years but I mean, I guess we haven't
included those.
Robbins: So it's something that's, I shouldn't say readily but it is
something that if a person asks, they could ask and say what's in the
account as of date or what's your profit and loss or whatever?
Gerhardt: You see the expenditure side of each of the budgets because
you approve all the bills.
Robbins: That's the expense side. We don't see the revenue side.
Mousin~ end Redevelopment Authority
November 19, 1992 - Page 15
Gerhardt: The revenue is done twice a year.
chmiel: Charlie, I've gone through that same process wondering and I've
.~one in and looked at it and it's available.
Robb±ns: Okay, I just asked.
Workman: Can you maybe highlight that for us at the next meeting and
show us if we're investing or what we're doing?
Gerhardt: I'll put a month to month together. Whatever we have in there
and then I'ii give you receipts for the first half and we should have
second half.
Asnworth: We maintain for the HRA detail budget reports, summary budget
reports, detail subledger on expense, detail subledger on revenue,
general ledger, all general ledger balance accounts. You're included as
a part of the annual audit so the records of the HRA are audited by
Deloitte. They make out the subsidiary statements verifying that all the
records are accurate. You have a vendor analysis for the HRA. Receipt
re~ister for the HRA.
Robbins: So the numbers are there then?
Ashworth: Yeah.
Robbins: Okay. I think it just might be interesting to see them,
personally on a quarterly basis of what our revenues to date, budget,
expenses to date. Very general. Nothing really detailed. As more of a
~eneral p and L and a balance sheet item. In other words, quarterly
statements. No more than a lender would ask.
Ashworth: We'll include the B & R's in the next one. We'll also include
then a copy of the 1991 year end audit report as it deals with the HRA
accounts.
Gerhardt: Within this budget it shows you up above what you're going to
Aet in increment and that 460..., that's the revenues that you collect
every year from the tax increment receipts. $4,600,871.00. Those were
your collections in revenues from the tax increment district. Interest
earnings, $50,000.00 off of that and then down below, you're going to
have expenditures to pay off the special assessments of $1,172,817.00.
And then you add all these other ones down there and you've got
$4,914,840.00. So what it doesn't show is cash...
Workman: What is the total transfer number then if it's not
You've got the $3.7 there below it. What is that, a subtraction?
"hmiel: Yeah
Workman: I see the revenue.
Chmi~l; What you're saying is under the budget in itself. Take '92 at
the bottom Prior to the transfers.
Housinn and Redevelopment Authority
November 19. 1992 - Page 16
Workman: Maybe I can move up to the top.
Gerhardt: You can take the transfer to debt service away from this. So
rheem numbers from what is the $1,172,817. these are all totals.
Ashworth: The $3.7 million appears to be a bad number to me. I would
say it totals the $4.9 million. Because if you started, if You have a
fund balance forward of $1.1 million, you're bringing in $4.2 million so
that's $5.3 million and you're ending up with $500,000.00 as a reserve.
Zero balance. That means that your total expense has to be the $4.9
million and not the $3.7 million.
Robbins: The way this is structured, the way I would look at it is that
transfers to debt, we're paying off obligations. So technically have
that as an expense so that should come under the expenditure column
rather than being another category.
Ashworth: Governmental accounting typically have your transfers in and
out as a separate category. Revenue expense transfers in and out.
Robbins: Yeah, I'm just looking at it in pure numbers. We take in some
money. You pay out. I don't care whether you pay it out on debt or you
may it out on buying Christmas trees. It's still an expense.
Ashworth: It's still an expense but if I were to check with Tom but my,
I would have the tendency to just scratch out the line that says $3.7
million because that appears.
RoDbins: Yeah, because that doesn't mean anything.'
Workman: Okay. Any further discussion on this exciting stuff?
8chh: Does this '93 budget include the Red-E-Mix building?
Gerhardt: That again would be a capital project so, no.
8ohn: Same thing with the Pauly Road extension?
Ashworth: Typically a project that you authorize, once it's' actually
kind of accomplished, you won't see that as a transfer until probably two
years later. So we would authorize the coordination of the cooperative
a~reement with Highway 5 and that was, the agreement was from'more than a
year ago. Work was done during this past year. It was included then in
the last bond sale. That was one of the items in there and the first
debt payment on that will not occur until 1993 or '94. TI .bonds taxable.
That's not even shown so that one won't show 'until 1994. That's the
first time you'll see that and then you'll have TI bonds of 1992.
RoDbins: Would that also be the same rational as any property that sold
in the 8usiness Park? That's been changing hands in '92. That's going
to be effective '93 or '94 so it won't show up here?
Ashworth: There's a lag.in the receipts in a similar fashion..
Housing and Redevelopment Authority
November 19, 1992 - Page iF
Robbins: That's the point. Is that it won't even show then?
Ashworth: Yeah. Like Rosemount was built just like your house or mine.
It has a delay in that receipt.
Robbins: Do we need any action on this or do we just approve it?
Gerhardt: We will have another meeting in December. If you feel
comfortable with it tonight, sure. Approve it. If not, it will be back
on in your December meeting.
Robbins: What could we change?
Gerhardt We could get you some of the information that you had
requested. If you feel more comfortable in approving it or you can
approve it and we'll still get the information.
Workman: I'd say let's wait, as long as it doesn't matter. Some of
these numbers don't match and I'd feel more comfortable.
Chmiel: I've got one quick question too. I always have quick questions.
]'hat special assessment reduction really, debt service as we've had it
for ~4,172,817.00. How many more years is that going to take before we
come back down to a zero? Do you know?
Ashworth: -That is buying down the assessments again on a lot of these
pro.iects. Some of them, like the original Business Park I believe were.
Gernardt: There's 2-3 years left on Chan Lakes.
Ashworth: Chan Lakes Business Park? The ones let's say for Rosemount,
Empak, Lake Drive, that was an 8 year so in about 6 years. What I can do
is I can give you a copy of the schedule. So in other words, for each
one of those business, for each year that we've taken over that
assessment, we show each one of those. Then the timeframe and you kind
of run these numbers out. Here's the total for '98 and '99.
Gerhardt: I mean if we didn't do another project, we'd have enough
revenue by the year 1996 to pay everything off.
Ashworth: Well not with what has been approved during the course of this
past >'ear. We've literally...
(There t,Jas a tape change at this point in the discussion.)
Ashworth: ...You're really very limited in terms of your caiptal
expense. So you know if we had to go through some real gyrations because
we needed an articulated snowplow to take care of the downtown area, and
that's not the type of thing that's really covered under Statutes so we
had to look at another means by which we could basically get that taken
care of. One of the reasons that everything that you do is kind of as a
oro.]e=t expense is to insure that it gets into your tax increment fund.
That the attorneys have approved that as a valid expense and literally in
bonding for it you're assured that.everybody has said yes. This is an
Housing and Redevelopment Authority
November 19, 1992 - Page 18
item that the HRA can spend their dollars on. $o that's the reason it's
kind of handled as a project kind of thing. 8ack to your question'
though. If the HRA had some specific things that you as a group could
say well. we should really be doing, even if you tell me that, we should
De doing whatever. I would still suggest then that we do it as a project
that you identify in your plan. You don't have a whole lot of
discretion.
?~oDbins: Back to that. With regard to the Pony/Pauly/Pryzmus building.
When do those leases expire on Pauly, because I believe was it in '93 or
~947
gshworth: July of '94.
Robbins: I'm sorry Don..
Ashworth: Todd just corrected me. To May 1st of '94.
Robbins: So we don't have to worry about '93 at all then? $o in '94
then things happen someplace. Would that be something we'd want to put
in to be a capital expenditure to do research or to do anything or do we
have to do anything on that on legal fees or does that start at
expiration? I'm using legal fees as an example but to do any more
exploration on that property? Do we have to do anything?
Ashworth: Well, our position has been to.
Rombins: Expense side wise.
Ashworth: Try to get Jeff to finish up-his plan and re-present that. Is
this what you want to do? We saw that at that Point in time we
re-present it. You tell us yeah. That's what we'd really like to do. Or
if at that point in time you'd'say, gee I'd like to see some other
alternatives. That would be the timeframe that you would authorize
whatever happens to be. Go out and find another architect. Give us a
fourth opinion as to what we should do with that piece. See there again,
you've ~ot more latitude because once you take on a project, it's even
like this front, this City Center Park. As a bondable cost that's going
to occur at some point in the future, we're identifying it as a plan
amendment so that everybody knows that's something we're going to do. But
as a pro.ject you can legally have legal expenses associated with your
~ro.~ect so you accumulate all of those. And have certain engineering
costs and right on down the line. Those will all tag right along with
that pro.~ect so when you finally bond for that project, it's included.
Ail the administrative expense. Engineering. Legal right on down the
line.
RoDbins: I move tabling the budget until the meeting in December.
Workman: Is there a second?
Chmzal: $o moved.
Workman: Any further discussion? "
!--lousing and Redevelopment Authority
November 19, 1992- Page 19
Robbins moved, Chmiel seconded to table the 1~ budget for the Housing
and Redevelopment Authority until the December, 1992 meeting. All voted
~n favor and the motion carried.
~EQUEST FOR ASSISTANCE FOR LAJ(E SUSAN A~ LA~[ SUSA~ C(~PfUNITY PARK.
"'shwor t h -~
huntin~.
Todd Hoffman is not present this evening. I think he's out
Gerhardt: No, he's at a 3 day conference in Rochester for the Park and
Recreation.
>.'.orkman: It looks like he has a representative here though.
Gernardt: No, Planning Commissioner. I'll represent Todd. Todd
Hoffman~s requesting assistance from the HRA. I handed out tonight a
letter from the DNR and some of the local residents of the Lake Susan
area and their needs and wants of an aerator on Lake Susan to make sure
that the lake doesn't freeze out again this year. I think Todd listed in
his memo the years that the lake had frozen and cut off all the oxygen
supply to the fish, and it was several years in a row. This past year
the City and the DNR completed a boat access to Lake Susan. With the
construction of that boat access, the DNR went out there and put in, did
they say how many fingerlings. Walleye fingerlings. He gave away the
walleye lake that city employees have been out there working on. But it
bas real potential of having some real nice walleyes next year. There
were some fingerlings planted 'or stocked there this last year and the
bio,est fear that we have right now is that the lake would freeze over
solid again this year and those fingerlings would die. Todd had made
a~Plication with the DNR to, in hopes to get an aerator through a CORE.
Coo~rative Opportunity and Resource ~rant, and were unsuccessful in
~ettin~ that. They had cut their funds. This is one of the programs
that they cut into. We're really down to the last couple of days here to
~et that aerator in place. So the lake's going to be frozen and you have
your backs uo against your wall here.
Chmiel: Mr. Chairman.
Norkman: Mayor Chmiel.
Chmie!.' Just plain John Doe. In lookin~; at this thing in the entirety
and tbs amount of kills that have been present within that lake from 1974
and not necessarily every year but it's close to that, through 1990. It
appears to me that because of the size of the lake, as small as it is,
some aeration is going to be needed within. My only concern is with this
aerator is that it is able to take the water from the upper portion of
that lake rather than down below, to eliminate any stir of the bottom of
t~at lake and could cause some given problems. So hopefully that aerator
that's .~.oing to go in is the proper type of aerator for that lake and not
causin.~ any real problems for the fish. Because as it shows here. we're
$0,000 walleye fry and 5,300 bass fry put into Lake Susan. A fish fry is
no more than a half inch in size after they have bee~ incubated and born
let's say. And so with that I think that, as the~'ve indicated there is
a ~reat reduced number of predators within that lake which would kill off
Housin~ and Redevelopment Authority
November 19, 1992 - Page 20
all :nese fish. In order to make that a good fishing area I would'
~ungest that we provide an aerator for that and I would make that into a
motion. But knowing that the cost involvement in this has not been
indicated, I'd like to know, do we have any idea as to what that aerator
cost would be?
Gernardt: Todd put in there not to exceed $25,000.00 to bring
elect!-icity.
C:hmiel~ Right, that's in his last paragraph.
Gerhardt: To bring electricity down, installation of the aerator and so
I thought that aertor itself was somewhere around $15,000.00 to
$i8,000.00 and it was like $5,000.00 to $7,000.00.
Ashworth: I think it's got to be closer to 25 for just the aerator. The
electricity is down there. I realize that they've got to get it out into
the water and so there is some additional but I mean they've actually got
the transfo~'mer or whatever it is down at the lake. It will have to be
under 25. If it exceeds 25, you have to go through the formal bidding
process and you can forget it. So if you make your motion to not to
exceed 25 and it may be good.
Chmie~
~: That it not exceed $24,999.00.
Bohn: I'll second that motion.
Chmiel: Mw other concern is, do we have any other lakes within the city
that has had fish kill as greatly as what we've had at Susan? I'm
tninkin~ that if we put one here, the adjacent residents in the other
areas could be requesting the same thing.
~shworth: The only difference there is this is kind of like, LuAnn
wanting us to fix up Chart View and we say, well the line of the district
ends here LuAnn. We can do the stuff inside of the district but we can't
no over and do your street.
Chmiel: Thank you. That's what I was looking for. Okay.
Workman: I'm seeing in the Chaska paper that I get every week that
they've got a lot of warning advertising going on. This is another cost
about omen water. I don't know if the Park and Rec, has the Park and Rec
gone over this or is Todd kind of going around them briefly? 8ecause I
know when we talked about that million dollar deal 4 years ago on the
chain of lakes, and they were going to put aerators in Lucy'and open
water and the snowmobiles and the safety and everything else like that,
that's where the Mayor's concern'about what kind of aerator used might
have some impact. So I don't want to be too hasty about pioneering if
it's noing to cause us some sort of other liability but if we went over
to Aeration Industries over there and used their's, we'd"have a whole
lake that would be in real tough shape~ .
Ashworth: Todd seems very, very knowledgable in this area. I've quizzed
him on some of those same type of things. He's given me responses
Housin~ and Redevelopment Authority
November 19, 1992 - Page 21
that... What I would suggest is you add onto the motion, and it may be
Tom. it may be Don. Whomever but that a HRA member talk with Todd and
~ei that he really has thought out all of the potential liabilities and
that you're not going to have those associated with the one that he's
~%'omosin~ to put in. I think again if you would put that into your
motion and I don't know who feels most qualified from the HRA level, but
sp~ndin~ 10-15 minutes with him I think would really alleviate your
concerns.
WOrKman: Maybe 3 hours with Eric Rivkin. He taught me a lot.
chmiel: I'd be more than happy to have discussions with him on that but
There are some liabilities that I can see that we're going to have to
most in and adjacent to that lake regarding snowmobiling.
Gerhardt: I think we're going to have to put more than just posts. I
think we're going to have put some kind of fencing or something.
Asnworth: The way he explained it to me is that these new aerators, that
it's a very defined area that is going to be kept open. Such that you
can !zterally post that edge and feel relatively assured that it will
stay there and that's exactly where it's going to be.
Chmiel: We have had liabilities with one of our generating plants from
~orth~rn States Power in posting because of the water coming back from
the nenerator and going back into the river with heated temperatures. It
omens the water and keeps it open and often times, even though you post
Zt, someone still goes through. My suggestion would be with this
aeration with the circumference of what that might be within the lake.
it's not going to take care of the entirety of the lake. It's just goin~
to mrovide a certain amount of oxygen to get back down to the water. So
if we were able to post and put something in and around that
circumference, that may be one way to alleviate that ~iven problem.
Ashworth: And Todd assures me that that can be done. In fact, if
there's kind of a liability. It is such a defined area versus some of
these older ones that I guess really messed up like the whole lake. But
~t's a very defined area and you're going to find that the fishermen .just
love that because this is open water and it's a defined area. You can
~et out there. You can stand on this ice right adjacent to this thin~
and good fishing.
· Cnmie!: Well I don't want to see snowmobiles going by and trolling.
workman: Lastly for me is the DNR releasing 80,000 fries in a lake that
,eezes out every year so the bullheads and carp can eat them?
~shworth: According to Todd, they really felt that they were going to be
able to ~et this thing in. It's been the latest budget thing that jerked
she ru~ from under them. We would not have gone so far as getting
electrical down and getting everything ready to go but we assured we had
%heir a~reement that this, it would go in. Go into this lake this year.
~-~ousin~ and Redevelopment Author£ty
NovemDer 19. 1992 - Page 22
~.~orkman: Friendly amendment to have the Mayor talk with Todd and other
~nan that, any other discussion? :
RoDbzn~: I wanted to help also since I was on Park and Rec for 6 years
and ha,/in~ been involved with Lake Susan originally when it started. I
~uess .~ust a question though. Just more with doing this with DNR, is it
~o~ible, and it's not even mentioned here but is it possible that
~hey~re looking at to doing that kind of access on Susan?
Cnmiei~ There is.
mean a public boat and everything else for launching.
tnmiel: Yes. there is.
[-:oDbins: I don't think there is yet.
cnmiel: Yes. The access is there.
~oobins: The access is there but I think it's still states non-
motorized.
Chmiei: No. Because there are other motorized boats that are existing
on the ].ake now of the property owners.
Ashworth: You can put in a motorized boat.
~oboins: I withdraw the question.
Gerhardt-' Just this last spring.
There's a motion with a second.
chmiel moved, Bohn seconded that the Housing and Redevelopment Authority
authorize to fund an amount not to exceed $24,499.00 to purchase a lake
aeration system for Lake Susan, and directing Mayor Chmiel and Charlie
RoOoins to hold discussions with Todd Hoffman to alleviate any of the
!iRa's concerns. Ali voted in favor and the motion carried.
~PPROVAL OF BILLS:
Chmiei~ I'd move it with discussion.
~orKman: Is there a second?
RoDbins: Second with discussion.
~orKman: Discuss away. Mayor.
Chmiel: Just the one question on those special assessment payments that
w~ had on County 17 for that $8~,923.00. Just clarify that a little bit
more.
d~rhardt: That's OUT special assessment reduction program. The pay as
· =-ou co pro,ram similar to what we did with Target. That is their
~4ousinn and Redevelopment Authority
November lg, lgg2 - Page 23
r~oaTment back for land write down based on the 3 year policy.
Chmiel: Now is this south of TH 5?
~ernardt: Yes. This is the new facility off of Lake Drive. Just to the
~est of Roberts Automatic and to the north of Lake Susan Park.
~obDins: On mine, the Holmes and Graven. I thought we're no longer
usinn them for legal practice is one. That's the first question. The
other is, I'm assuming that the Guy Paterson was just a transfer cost.
Transfer from one to the unit or is that buying our his land or what is
that all about?
Gerhardt: Guy Paterson was the final payment to him on the acquisition.
~-le was, you purchased the property for 313. I think he received
_~omethin.~ iike 250.
~:oDOins: $o this was the residual left over? Okay, fair enough.
ashworth: Generally we have not been usin~ Holmes and Graven. Referrin~
%o Roger's costs are less and I think if we get the contract documents
out .... etc. We proceeded on that basis and one of the reasons is
they"re cheaper is that means Todd and I handle the calls and
negotiations with... I will be very truthful. Between Todd and I we
were at our wits end with Target. They beat you up. It got to the point
where Oici< walked out of my office and said, I'm not coming back and I
said ~reat. That's the best news I've had all week. Later on I told
~odd I said, we shouldn't let this deal die. We're both just up to here
wi~h those guys. We've got an existing policy. Here's how it works.
Here's what you get and that's it. It sounds simple. It isn't. I got a
boio of John Dean. I said, 3Chh if there's an opportunity to bring this
tdin~ back together, I need to have a third party. I need to have a
tnard Party who's skilled in negotiations. Holmes. and Graven are that.
Rocer Ogee a very good job in terms of drafting the contracts, etc. Thew
~re not really negotiaters and you can thank Holmes and Graven for
muttin~ that deal back in place. And it gave Todd and I an additional
cushion because then as they yelled at Holmes and Graven, they could say
well we need to check with Don and Todd and you know, kind of go through
5nat kind of a process which hadn't been necessary on some of the Empak
and some of the other ones. But that deal just about didn't happen and
~ .~ust about didn't care.
~oDbins: And then on the payment to Jim Burdick for 13 grand. Is that a
martial on the land? For Target land or what are we doin~ there?
Gerhardt: With the purchase of his piece of property that we entered
into back in the later part of the spring, early part of summer, we were
to close by the middle of October. If we didn't close by October let or
· % was before November let, we had to pay a penalty of half percent for
t~e total Qurchase price. That is that penalty that half percent for
November.
RoObins: Okay. No other questions.
~iousin~ and Redevelopment. Authority
November 19, 1992 - Page 24
Chmzel moved, Robbins seconded to approve the HR~ bills as presented.
41I voted in favor and the motion carried.
f~obbins moved,'Workman seconded to adjourn the meeting. Oil voted in
favor and the motion carried. The meeting was adjourned.
submitted by Don Ashworth
Executive Director
Prepared by Nann Opheim